Democratic v.s. Republican Presidential Candidates on Science, Revisited

"Democrats and Republicans — what’s the difference?" It’s an old refrain, and might have made sense in 1988. But for all their compromises and all the problems of the American political system, it’s no longer possible to imagine that the parties are not on two very separate tracks headed into the 2008 elections, and the […]

Flag
"Democrats and Republicans -- what's the difference?" It's an old refrain, and might have made sense in 1988. But for all their compromises and all the problems of the American political system, it's no longer possible to imagine that the parties are not on two very separate tracks headed into the 2008 elections, and the difference is especially stark on issues of science.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science has a website devoted to the candidates' positions on science issues. It's much more thorough than the summary published last week in their journal, Science. (Wired Science covered that separately for Democrats and Republicans.) As a rule, Democrats have more concrete and ambitious proposals for developing clean energy and reducing greenhouse gases -- and if you believe the world's climate scientists, that's the single most pressing scientific issue, if not the most pressing issue, now facing the human race.

Image: Luigi Anzivino

See Also:

Science Journalism 2.0: Pop the hood on Wired Science....